Issue-#158 LowLevel debugging

Locked

Should we incorporate these changes into the master?

Poll ended at Mon May 22, 2017 7:09 pm

Yes
5
83%
No
0
No votes
Abstain
1
17%
 
Total votes: 6

User avatar
Robert
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:04 am
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Issue-#158 LowLevel debugging

Post by Robert »

User avatar
Robert
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:04 am
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Re: Issue-#158 LowLevel debugging

Post by Robert »

We have 9 members, and 80% constitute a quorum (ie we need 8 votes; 7 is insufficient).
On the other hand 5 'Yesses' cannot be defeated, so wins.

Are these rules inconsistent? See https://wiki.blackboxframework.org/inde ... tle=Center.

So:
1 - This topic needs more responses
2 - Maybe we need to revise / clarify our rules?
cfbsoftware
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Issue-#158 LowLevel debugging

Post by cfbsoftware »

Robert wrote:We have 9 members, and 80% constitute a quorum
I understood the quorum to be 70%:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20

However, if the subject is up for discussion again I propose that the quorum should be:

(Number of members DIV 2) + 1

i.e. currently 5.

The intention of a quorum is simply to avoid decisions being made by a minority in situations caused by loss of contact, non-availability etc. This formula guarantees a majority of members has voted and avoids having a quorum with a fractional part of a person as we have now.
User avatar
DGDanforth
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:16 am
Location: Palo Alto, California, USA
Contact:

Re: Issue-#158 LowLevel debugging

Post by DGDanforth »

cfbsoftware wrote:However, if the subject is up for discussion again I propose that the quorum should be:

(Number of members DIV 2) + 1

i.e. currently 5.
I support Chris' suggestion.
User avatar
Robert
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:04 am
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Re: Issue-#158 LowLevel debugging

Post by Robert »

Vote passed.
I have locked this topic, but copied the unfinished quorum discussion to a new thread.
Locked